Coaches Confidential: How would you feel about a one-time transfer in high school sports?

[Muda69]

https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/high-school/2024/08/05/indiana-high-school-football-coaches-thoughts-on-possible-ihsaa-one-time-transfer-rule-pros-cons/73924928007/

Quote

We asked four questions for our “Coaches Confidential” series, which grants anonymity to high school football coaches in Central Indiana. The first question asks:

The IHSAA plans to study the transfer rule during the 2024-25 school year. Would you be in favor of a potential one-time transfer after a freshman year? In your opinion, what should be the rule on transfers?

 

In favor

“Since coaches and teachers can leave any time, I believe we should allow at one-time transfer for the students.”

***

“I would be in favor of the one-time transfer rule. The sneakiness around transferring can cause a rift for a kid once the rumors start flying.”

***

“I would be in favor of allowing students to transfer one time. I think it would put the power in the hands of the players and balance out programs. We do not own these players. They should be free to make their own decisions. Football and basketball more so deal with this. If a tennis player wanted to transfer, they would be ruled full eligibility. As coaches, we have to check our own ego and run programs that attract student-athletes and retain our own.”

***

“Yes, I am in favor of a one-time transfer. The amount of recruiting going on at the lower levels (especially at the middle school level) is out of control. The number of coaches calling my players on a regular basis tells me that there are no borders and I do not see this changing or anyone having the ability to control this. I believe that if a player no longer wants to play at your school they should be allowed to go. If a player knows he will not be able to play at your school because they are not good enough, they should be allowed to transfer to maybe play somewhere else. We work very hard just trying to retain the players that live in our township with winter camps, youth leagues, summer camps and various activities that would make them want to stay in the school system. Even with all the extra we do, we still lose players to other schools for various reasons. Parents are chasing scholarships and promises of playing time. We have numerous players return every year when it does not work the way they thought it might. No rules are going to be able to fix this and, in the end, it should always be about the athlete having the ability to play.”

***

“Yes, I would be in favor of a transfer rule without having it go through the IHSAA. Any transfer after would then go through the IHSAA’s current procedure. It should always be about what’s best for the student-athlete and not what’s best for the school’s football program or coach. I could talk about this rule for days.”

***

“I think a one-time transfer would be fine. There are so many kids moving around it would help take the IHSAA out of the way of kids wanting to play.”

***

“I am all for a one-time transfer for any reason. I think too many times IHSAA or people get involved in family decisions. If a family chooses to take their child to a different school whether athletic or academic, I think we as adults and coaches should not be able to hold that child back. As a coach, my job is to build relationships with my players and families so that kids in my system want to play for me and for their community.”

***

“A one-time transfer rule would be fine. Way better than free-for-all we have now, especially in the Indianapolis area. It would make management for the IHSAA much easier. That way they could look into possible undue influence cases and second-time transfers that claim a move of address much more thoroughly.”

***

“Yes. I think one is fine but school academics should be the first priority.”

***

“I see that as a positive for Indiana. I never like hammering a kid for 365 (days).”

***

“Yes, kids are already going left and right.”

***

“Yes, I support the one-time transfer rule. I support full transfer authority left to parents and students, especially in the city where parents are more transient.”

***

“My opinion is that wherever is best for that family, they should be able to choose. Send your kids wherever you want.”

Not in favor

“No. Keep the rule the way it is. One-time transfer will just open up Pandora's box.”

 

***

“It seems to me that most kids that transfer are granted eligibility, so I don’t think it matters too much. I hate the idea of being so open in supporting the idea of leaving your school. Kids need to learn to stick with it and develop.”

***

“I’m old school when it comes to students transferring in high school for athletic advantages. I don’t believe that should be a driving force. There are exceptions to the rule of course — emergencies, school academically not being a fit, etc. But I think that leaves too much room for unfair advantages in athletics. Also, against private schools being able to recruit high school players from public schools. We shouldn’t compete against private schools for championships if we’re not all following the same rules.”

***

“No, the transfers 10-15 years ago weren’t as common. The only way a transfer should go through is if they physically move into the school corporation. They already allow open enrollment; if they open up the floodgates, it takes away the principle of high school sports.”

***

“I would not be in favor of a transfer rule. I think we can’t handle seeding, why in the world or how in the world could they not turn transfers into a mess? The NCAA would like to put that back in the box, so why are we going to let that one out of the box?”

***

“I don’t favor it. Transfers should be held to those that move and change addresses. Transfer portal is a bad idea. It’s high school athletics. It is supposed to be community based.”

***

“No, I believe that puts a strain on coaches and would increase the potential for recruiting. Would further the distance between the haves and have nots. Lower-end teams would potentially lose their better players and hurt many programs’ ability to be successful. Transfers should remain as they are. IHSAA needs to use common sense when dealing with special circumstances.”

***

“I think this is such a slippery slope. This rule could really damage many programs and make high school football all about the money instead of education-based athletics.”

***

“No. If you transfer without moving into the correct school district, you sit for 365 days.”

***

“No. I like teams to have players from their respective communities.”

***

“My opinion would be that the student-athlete would need to sit out 365 days from his last varsity contest before he would be eligible to play in a varsity contest for football.”

***

“No. Transferring has gotten out of control. It should be more heavily regulated by the IHSAA.”

***

“Unfortunately, we have already started to see athletes being pulled in different directions due to undue influences from other programs. If you open this door, then undue influence will only increase and cause issues across the board.”

***

“The truth of the matter is that some programs will not be able to control their own self-interest and we will see athletes moving schools due to undue influence.”

***

“No. I think kids should be able to transfer before their freshman year. If they transfer after freshman year (without moving), I think they should have to sit out a year. The problem is honestly amongst schools on whether or not kids physically move into the district.”

***

“No need for it. It will just create more messes and more tampering.”

***

“No. Keep it like it is. Students in high school should not be transferring for athletic reasons.”

***

“No to a one-time transfer after freshman year. Every scenario is different, though. In favor of the IHSAA studying the transfer rule so we can generate policies that prove to be best for our student-athletes.”

***

“No. All transfers should go through the entire process that has been established. Schools that allow out of district students need to make sure the IHSAA knows about their enrollment policies to help keep the communication clear in the entire transfer process. Schools that don’t allow out of district transfers — and the IHSAA — need to make sure families are committed and living within the district boundaries based on documented domain purchase/lease or rental agreements. Any second or third transfer will be an initial limited eligibility ruling unless the transfer is found to be the result of special circumstances.”

***

“Keep it like it is. Rule is pretty clean cut right now.”

***

“If we change it to a one-time transfer, there will be a lot more players being paid to transfer like they are now.”

***

“Horrible idea. NCAA has proven that already. A lot of bad characters will get involved. Hold coaches responsible for tampering, including tournament suspensions.”

In the middle

“I am not opposed to the one-time transfer idea, but the college transfer portal model is a disaster.”

***

“I have no opinion on this, but I do think an amendment to allow one-time transfers like that will create more imbalance and lack of parity. Prepare to create more divisiveness between the publics and the privates.”

***

“Many players transfer for a variety of reasons; most are based on family or academics. I think the core issue we have is the idea of transferring due to athletics. I have noticed a trend that families are deciding to transfer from bigger schools to smaller schools or prep schools to guarantee starting spots. If we want to address transfer as a problem, then we must be honest with ourselves and why. I am for a one-time transfer if it eliminates the possibility for families and players to transfer multiple times thereafter on the basis of athletics. We see this a lot in many other sports and in football it is trending that way. However, if we can keep the integrity of the game and some compromise then it would be best for our game.”

***

“If it would benefit a player’s educational future.”

***

“I am open to the idea of transfer players. However, I do feel that if there is a rule in place, it must be strictly enforced and there should be heavy penalties for not adhering to that. I don’t know what that looks like as I haven’t thought through that, but I do feel there should be measures in place such as a window to transfer and definitely a one-time transfer rule.”

***

“I believe that a one-time transfer would be enough. I understand that life may happen for families and people will have to move. But I am frustrated at the frequency of players changing high schools due to playing time, especially in Marion County.”

***

“I feel like the community aspect of high school sports has disappeared and part of that is the transfer, especially in the loop area. With that stated, I am in favor of families finding the best environment for their children. It is a difficult conversation as coaches and programs put so much effort and work into their youth programs to only have kids transfer after their freshman year. With that said, it is our responsibility to build programs that people want to be part of.”

***

“Whatever is decided it should never be allowed during the season. For example, starting on one team and then transferring midseason or before tournament play.”

***

“With the way the college game has gone, I am not sure we can keep the lid on the jar much longer sadly. Some things trend upwards in football and move form high school to the college level. On the flip side, some things trickle down. With how out of control and, to a degree, popular the transfer portal has gotten in college, I don’t see how we can stop it. One solution to the college problem in my opinion should be one free transfer in your four years — after that it is a one-year suspension and loss of that season eligibility if you leave again. It has to get capped. At the end of the day, they are teenage kids trying to make a decision that impacts their future heavily and they all make mistakes. We all made mistakes. You shouldn’t have to pay for that for 4-5 years in picking a college. So, you get once chance to rectify your decision. In high school we don’t have freedom of choice so much, but kids pick schools and for some reason maybe something just doesn’t work out for you in whatever aspect that may be. You get one chance to choose a different path and a better experience. After that though you may want to go to a third or fourth school for some reason, but you won’t be playing sports anymore if you take the year of eligibility away. We can’t keep the lid on the jar but maybe we can filter what is coming out of it.”

***

“I will abide with what the IHSAA requires. This is not a hill to die on.”

***

“This is a tough question. Kids are transferring a lot anyway for sports reasons and they know how to play the system to get eligibility in my opinion. I don’t want high school athletics to end up like college, though, where kids are constantly looking for a better option and there is little loyalty.”

***

“I haven’t really spent much time thinking about this. Until there are changes, I won’t really worry about it. I think it’s a complicated issue that also involves educational issues in general in our state. It’s far above my knowledge and expertise.”

***

“My take on transfers is this: If a player feels as if they can thrive in another setting, I wish them well. What the student-athlete and family have to realize is that playing hot potato with schools is not a good look for that athlete. The athlete and family have to identify with what they are creating. They are creating a person who believes that they should go where it is easiest and not tackle adversity. The rule on transfers should be they can transfer once before their junior year. Families can’t put all their marbles in sports. The student has to identify with what they are going to study if their body fails them. The family must prioritize education and athletics.”

Thoughts from the GID cognoscenti? 

[BTF]

I'll roll with "no." This isn't college, keep high school pure. 

[Bobref]

14 minutes ago, BTF said:

keep high school pure

😂🤣😅

[btownqbcoach1]

"Since coaches and teachers can leave any time, I believe we should allow at one-time transfer for the students."

 

This is absolutely cringe-worthy quote. 

 

It's also stupid when they bring that point up in college. 

 

[JQWL]

33 minutes ago, btownqbcoach1 said:

"Since coaches and teachers can leave any time, I believe we should allow at one-time transfer for the students."

 

This is absolutely cringe-worthy quote. 

 

It's also stupid when they bring that point up in college. 

 

Speaking of colleges, if students that do not participate in athletics can transfer wherever they want, with no restrictions, shouldn't student athletes? Scholarships are renewable on a year by year basis. The athlete isn't bound by anything other than the one year.

In regard to high school, I wish the IHSAA would institute a rule that whichever school the student is enrolled with when schools return from Dead Week, that is who you are eligible to play with, the exception being an actual physical move during a school year. That would remove some of the judgment calls the IHSAA has to make every year that seem to be inconsistent. This would also be more consistent with "Open Enrollment" the IDOE has instituted.

[BTF]

1 hour ago, btownqbcoach1 said:

"Since coaches and teachers can leave any time, I believe we should allow at one-time transfer for the students."

 

This is absolutely cringe-worthy quote. 

 

It's also stupid when they bring that point up in college. 

 

Elaborate on this if you would. I'm not in favor of transferring at the high school level, but this guy makes a good point. Let's say a kid joins a football program as a freshmen and feels that he may have potential to play at the next level. The current coach is a good guy, loves the kids, and has a strong commitment to the program. As a junior, a new guy takes over. This guy is either one of two things. One: He's ego driven and doesn't really care about the kids. It shows and has a difficult time relating to the current players. Two: Nice guy, but isn't committed making the program better, just going through the motions. Far different from the coach this kid had his first two seasons. In either case, should the kid have an opportunity to choose another school? I think he does. But if we open pandora's box, it's going to get out of hand. My vote would still be "no." Unfortunate for the kids that do have a legitimate case to move on. The last thing we need is for a coach who has to deal with several kids leaving in one season. Not sure many coaches would want to work under those conditions. I guess I'm asking your opinion as to why it's "cringe worthy." Those are powerful words.

[Bobref]

People who oppose free transferability of high school kids are also likely to lament the way college sports have been affected by NIL and the transfer portal. That’s because they have dramatically affected something we loved, and made it radically different from what it was. Perhaps, though, it’s simply an inevitable outgrowth of the way society now looks at teenagers much differently than they did just a generation ago. They have individual rights, and are treated more like adults than children. So, why should they have to justify where they go to school, and why? Other students don’t have to do that. It’s a growing realization that high school athletics are a part of - not separate from - real life.

[BTF]

3 minutes ago, Bobref said:

People who oppose free transferability of high school kids are also likely to lament the way college sports have been affected by NIL and the transfer portal. That’s because they have dramatically affected something we loved, and made it radically different from what it was. Perhaps, though, it’s simply an inevitable outgrowth of the way society now looks at teenagers much differently than they did just a generation ago. They have individual rights, and are treated more like adults than children. So, why should they have to justify where they go to school, and why? Other students don’t have to do that. It’s a growing realization that high school athletics are a part of - not separate from - real life.

That's a very liberal point of view. "Freedoms" are just getting too far out of hand, at the expense of morality and just plain "doing what's right." Again, laugh all you want, but keep the high school game pure of all this nonsense. 

[JQWL]

32 minutes ago, BTF said:

That's a very liberal point of view. "Freedoms" are just getting too far out of hand, at the expense of morality and just plain "doing what's right." Again, laugh all you want, but keep the high school game pure of all this nonsense. 

This is my favorite sentence I've ever read here.

The high school game is not pure at all and hasn't been for a long time.

[Muda69]

8 minutes ago, JQWL said:

This is my favorite sentence I've ever read here.

The high school game is not pure at all and hasn't been for a long time.

What would have to be done to return high school football to being "pure"?

After all it's just a game.  Played by children.

 

[JQWL]

4 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

What would have to be done to return high school football to being "pure"?

After all it's just a game.  Played by children.

 

I guess that would depend on the definition of "Pure." When someone says the high school game should be left pure, I envision a scenario where kids grow up together and attend their local high school together. I think of the movie The Sandlot. High school sports have not been like that for a long time. Open enrollment, private schools, and even allowing transfers between high schools has changed all of this.

If we are comparing this what we now have in college, as a fan I don't like all the movement. I enjoyed watching the 3-star come in as a freshman and sit on the bench his first two years and develop into an All-American like Russ Smith did at Louisville. However I agree that the student athletes should be allowed to transfer like they are currently doing. I think that is completely fair. So, I can dislike a rule but completely agree with it.

[JustRules]

One difference between HS and college is the "entertainment" factor of large numbers of fans attending the games. You follow your favorite college teams because you have a connection to the players on the team even if they are only there for a short time. The more they change the less you have that connection. That could ultimately be what causes college sports to eventually become more popular. I understand why the ability to transfer is important for the student-athlete, but it may ultimately lead to the demise of the sport from a fan perspective. It may still exist but much more like rugby or swimming or baseball exist. 

At the HS level, it's more of a personal connection for fans either because they have kids in the school or they live in the community and know the families. They will probably support the school regardless of what kids are there. It's much less of a fan-driven so I don't see them as equivalent situations. My issue with constant transferring is that it creates a lot of instability and the wrong focus for a young person at that age. Yes, going from school A to school B could help influence your ability to participate at the next level. But will it change it significantly? Recruiting is an educated guessing game so there are no guarantees regardless of where you go to school. HS athletics should be about participation and competition, and i prefer to see kids compete in the community where they live. Coaches shouldn't have to be recruiters as much as they are today.

[tango]

1 hour ago, BTF said:

That's a very liberal point of view. "Freedoms" are just getting too far out of hand, at the expense of morality and just plain "doing what's right." Again, laugh all you want, but keep the high school game pure of all this nonsense. 

How far do you want to roll it back? Back to when the IHSAA was controlled by such honorable men like Arthur Trester, who didn't allow African-American or Catholic schools to be members and participate in the state tournaments? That sure oozed morality and "doing what was right". 

 

20 minutes ago, JustRules said:

One difference between HS and college is the "entertainment" factor of large numbers of fans attending the games. You follow your favorite college teams because you have a connection to the players on the team even if they are only there for a short time. The more they change the less you have that connection. That could ultimately be what causes college sports to eventually become more popular. I understand why the ability to transfer is important for the student-athlete, but it may ultimately lead to the demise of the sport from a fan perspective. It may still exist but much more like rugby or swimming or baseball exist. 

At the HS level, it's more of a personal connection for fans either because they have kids in the school or they live in the community and know the families. They will probably support the school regardless of what kids are there. It's much less of a fan-driven so I don't see them as equivalent situations. My issue with constant transferring is that it creates a lot of instability and the wrong focus for a young person at that age. Yes, going from school A to school B could help influence your ability to participate at the next level. But will it change it significantly? Recruiting is an educated guessing game so there are no guarantees regardless of where you go to school. HS athletics should be about participation and competition, and i prefer to see kids compete in the community where they live. Coaches shouldn't have to be recruiters as much as they are today.

Good post. I can't speak for any other parochial school, but our coach is not out trying to contact or recruit players from public schools. 

[BTF]

1 hour ago, JQWL said:

This is my favorite sentence I've ever read here.

Flattered.

[btownqbcoach1]

3 hours ago, JQWL said:

Speaking of colleges, if students that do not participate in athletics can transfer wherever they want, with no restrictions, shouldn't student athletes? Scholarships are renewable on a year by year basis. The athlete isn't bound by anything other than the one year.

In regard to high school, I wish the IHSAA would institute a rule that whichever school the student is enrolled with when schools return from Dead Week, that is who you are eligible to play with, the exception being an actual physical move during a school year. That would remove some of the judgment calls the IHSAA has to make every year that seem to be inconsistent. This would also be more consistent with "Open Enrollment" the IDOE has instituted.

In my opinion-- no 

[btownqbcoach1]

2 hours ago, BTF said:

Elaborate on this if you would. I'm not in favor of transferring at the high school level, but this guy makes a good point. Let's say a kid joins a football program as a freshmen and feels that he may have potential to play at the next level. The current coach is a good guy, loves the kids, and has a strong commitment to the program. As a junior, a new guy takes over. This guy is either one of two things. One: He's ego driven and doesn't really care about the kids. It shows and has a difficult time relating to the current players. Two: Nice guy, but isn't committed making the program better, just going through the motions. Far different from the coach this kid had his first two seasons. In either case, should the kid have an opportunity to choose another school? I think he does. But if we open pandora's box, it's going to get out of hand. My vote would still be "no." Unfortunate for the kids that do have a legitimate case to move on. The last thing we need is for a coach who has to deal with several kids leaving in one season. Not sure many coaches would want to work under those conditions. I guess I'm asking your opinion as to why it's "cringe worthy." Those are powerful words.

If the kids want to transfer, then transfer... move districts and go to a new school. 

The fact coaches and teachers move JOBS is 1000000% irrelevant to this discussion and quite honestly shouldn't be brought up. Coaches, teachers, and students are 3 completely different entities--- never understood why anyone would compare a student to a coach. There really isn't much to compare.  

Do you know many students with a mortgagee, car payment, 8 month old daughter, wife, etc? 

[Donnie Baker]

1 hour ago, BTF said:

Flattered.

Shedoobie 

[btownqbcoach1]

2 hours ago, Bobref said:

People who oppose free transferability of high school kids are also likely to lament the way college sports have been affected by NIL and the transfer portal. That’s because they have dramatically affected something we loved, and made it radically different from what it was. Perhaps, though, it’s simply an inevitable outgrowth of the way society now looks at teenagers much differently than they did just a generation ago. They have individual rights, and are treated more like adults than children. So, why should they have to justify where they go to school, and why? Other students don’t have to do that. It’s a growing realization that high school athletics are a part of - not separate from - real life.

They don't act like adults more than they did a decade ago though, that's the issue. 

Why have any rules honestly? Why are they even made to go to school? I mean, what if they don't want to? 

[JQWL]

1 minute ago, btownqbcoach1 said:

If the kids want to transfer, then transfer... move districts and go to a new school. 

The fact coaches and teachers move JOBS is 1000000% irrelevant to this discussion and quite honestly shouldn't be brought up. Coaches, teachers, and students are 3 completely different entities--- never understood why anyone would compare a student to a coach. There really isn't much to compare.  

Do you know many students with a mortgagee, car payment, 8 month old daughter, wife, etc? 

In the past few years, Brownstown Central's basketball program benefited from transfer players from Scottsburg and came in during their freshman season. I'm not suggesting anything inappropriate happened. The kids got limited eligibility. Everything was on the up and up as far as the IHSAA was concerned. Did that bother you or change how you saw the recent state championship Brownstown won? They would have been really good regardless but that definitely helped put them over the top.

Also, I agree completely that students and coaches are not the same and can't be compared. In an earlier post, I compared student athletes to non-student athletes and you didn't like that either. What would you compare the situation of the student athlete on a 1 year scholarship?

[BTF]

6 minutes ago, btownqbcoach1 said:

Do you know many students with a mortgagee, car payment, 8 month old daughter, wife, etc? 

Well, no, but involving oneself with the right program could have scholarship implications. Player development. 

[Muda69]

13 minutes ago, btownqbcoach1 said:

If the kids want to transfer, then transfer... move districts and go to a new school. 

The fact coaches and teachers move JOBS is 1000000% irrelevant to this discussion and quite honestly shouldn't be brought up. Coaches, teachers, and students are 3 completely different entities--- never understood why anyone would compare a student to a coach. There really isn't much to compare.  

But is it ok for an OMG! Athlete to want to transfer to a certain high school due to a high profile football head coach currently coaching there?   

[tango]

16 minutes ago, Donnie Baker said:

Shedoobie 

Best post of the year

[btownqbcoach1]

14 minutes ago, JQWL said:

In the past few years, Brownstown Central's basketball program benefited from transfer players from Scottsburg and came in during their freshman season. I'm not suggesting anything inappropriate happened. The kids got limited eligibility. Everything was on the up and up as far as the IHSAA was concerned. Did that bother you or change how you saw the recent state championship Brownstown won? They would have been really good regardless but that definitely helped put them over the top.

Also, I agree completely that students and coaches are not the same and can't be compared. In an earlier post, I compared student athletes to non-student athletes and you didn't like that either. What would you compare the situation of the student athlete on a 1 year scholarship?

Why would them moving into our district bother me? Yes a transfer finally benefitted one of our sports programs. 

There is no comparison for a D1 athlete. How many more amenities do they need for it to be considered fair? good grief. 

[btownqbcoach1]

8 minutes ago, BTF said:

Well, no, but involving oneself with the right program could have scholarship implications. Player development. 

Then transfer there lol 

Move and transfer there.

It's got nothing to do with me being able to take another job though. It just shouldn't even be brought up as a reason for allowing a one time transfer. Doesn't make sense. 

[tango]

1 minute ago, btownqbcoach1 said:

Then transfer there lol 

Move and transfer there.

So I think you knew the neighborhood. Let's say a kid enrolled at Bosse and played a year, but transfers to Memorial. He walks from home to both schools. Why should his parents have to move?